File No. 341.622a/167
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Page)
3478. Your 4508, June 29. I can say that Sir Edward Grey’s reply is very unsatisfactory. I am greatly disappointed that he [Page 652] should believe that if the fact that any of these persons were “military or naval reservists or of military age” had been known to the British Government, the promise for their release “would never have been given.” I can not admit the settlement of this case upon such a reservation, as it is totally at variance with the rule to which both Governments are committed in their practice since the Civil War. Please communicate with Sir Edward in this sense, and ask him if he regards this memorandum as modifying the views expressed in his memorandum of May 8, forwarded in your 4289,1 May 12, and endeavor to induce him to withdraw his last memorandum or to substitute another one for it omitting the objectionable sentence or stating that in view of his promise already given it is unnecessary for him to express the views of His Majesty’s Government as to what action they would have taken had the reservist character of these men been known to the Government at the time of their seizure.
I know, of course, that some “arrangements” have been under way for some time for the departure of the men seized on the China, but as yet these arrangements have not materialized into anything effective. Please continue to insist upon their prompt release, as I am inclined to the view that the British Government is endeavoring to delay the release of the men in the hope of obtaining some concession from us in regard to the men whom Sir Edward appears still to believe have been rightfully seized. I can not make any concessions, as no reason therefor has as yet been produced; for not a single fact has been adduced to show that these men were incorporated in the armed forces of the enemies of Great Britain, and that the commander of the Laurentic or his Government knew this at the time of seizure.